2 million cash pumped into the business in return for shares. Reported at companies house.

Edited December 6, 20214 yr by Mounts Kipper

22 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

Where are you getting the 98.8% of revenue from?

£4M suggestion wasn't me, seems a little on the low side personally but then again I am optimistic.

The clubs own accounts, where else do you think I got them from?

If anyone wants to check, see under Financial KPI's - Football club, on page 4 of FV's latest accounts (Note on the 'page counter' at the top of the screen it shows as page 7 of 42 - that is because on the document itself, the first three pages are not numbered).

FOOTBALL VENTURES (WHITES) LIMITED filing history - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

The accounts relate to the 2024-25 season but I would strongly suspect that they will still be higher than the 85% for the season just ended in that I can't see wages would have dropped (we still retained a large squad) but income would have gone up due to the play offs/Wembley.

And yes you do certainly seem more optimistic than I am or I'm more pessimistic than you are (same difference really).

4 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

The clubs own accounts, where else do you think I got them from?

If anyone wants to check, see under Financial KPI's - Football club, on page 4 of FV's latest accounts (Note on the 'page counter' at the top of the screen it shows as page 7 of 42 - that is because on the document itself, the first three pages are not numbered).

FOOTBALL VENTURES (WHITES) LIMITED filing history - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

The accounts relate to the 2024-25 season but I would strongly suspect that they will still be higher than the 85% for the season just ended in that I can't see wages would have dropped (we still retained a large squad) but income would have gone up due to the play offs/Wembley.

And yes you do certainly seem more optimistic than I am or I'm more pessimistic than you are (same difference really).

That includes all club staff, not just the players, therefore a lot of it wouldn't be relevant to SCR?

Edited Sunday at 15:291 day by jmjhb

23 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

That includes all club staff, not just the players, therefore a lot of it wouldn't be relevant to SCR?

It's difficult to know without reading EFL's fine print definitions - this is what we know from what they've put in the public domain so far.

The SCR system limits Clubs spending on Player and Manager-related costs (including transfer fees)...

The accounts for FVWL (Football) Ltd shows that there are actually 401 employees (67 of whom are termed as football players)

Assuming football players mean football players only, then we need to add on the 'Manager-related costs - so what are those?

The manager yes, would that include the assistant managers, if so how far down do you go, does that include coaches perhaps - set pieces coaches, defensive coaches, goalkeeping coaches, etc?

If we return to the 67 football players, then clearly that goes beyond the first team - are they counted under SCR or not (I assume most of them are kids on peanuts anyway) BUT these kids can and do play for BWFC, included into match day squads at times (although exempted due to their age on being named in the official squad list given to the EFL) and even make their debuts in EFL games - so if they are counted does that mean the manager of the reserves (or whatever they are called) counted under 'Manager-related cost's' as well (and his assistant managers etc)?

Is even part of Harkins wages counted as he has overall officer responsibility for the football club, the club manager and all the players?

Do the costs (wages) of the recruitment staff that recruit the players to squad be part of the Squad Cost 'Manager-related' costs?

Even saying all that the highest wages at the football side of the club will be those of the first team, Schumacher and possibly his assistant managers.

I suggest the majority of those not directly involved with the football playing side are more likely to be ancillary staff such as low paid office and gardening staff or part-time staff only employed on match days, so although many in number but low on wage costs.

The only way we will know what is covered and what is not is when the EFL publishes SCR in full.

Even if you include all the staff mentioned there's maybe a good 250-300 who wouldn't count towards it

23 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

Even if you include all the staff mentioned there's maybe a good 250-300 who wouldn't count towards it

Yes, I've just said that.

34 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

I suggest the majority of those not directly involved with the football playing side are more likely to be ancillary staff such as low paid office and gardening staff or part-time staff only employed on match days, so although many in number but low on wage costs.

1 hour ago, jmjhb said:

That includes all club staff, not just the players, therefore a lot of it wouldn't be relevant to SCR?

I'm flabbergasted that @Sluffy would make such a basic error

It must be the heat

2 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Yes, I've just said that.

So you can probably halve that wages:turnover ratio of 98% then? Either way the actual figure, whilst not known, will be nowhere near that ratio. With the increase in revenue this season, whilst I think we'll be prudent, I feel there's more leeway. But perhaps it's just me being optimistic again.

Edited Sunday at 17:051 day by jmjhb

8 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

So you can probably halve that wages:turnover ratio of 98% then? Either way the actual figure, whilst not known, will be nowhere near that ratio. With the increase in revenue this season, whilst I think we'll be prudent, I feel there's more leeway. But perhaps it's just me being optimistic again.

We simply don't know until the EFL says what's counted and what's not.

49 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

The only way we will know what is covered and what is not is when the EFL publishes SCR in full.

The players wages will no doubt be the main contributing factor to the 98.8% shown in the last accounts, we will just have to see what percentage of turnover EFL's SCR determines that to be once it comes into force and don't forget the remaining amount not included as SCR still is a major cost on the business that posted a loss of £14.3m.

The trading loss is priority on FV's equity, that has to be budgeted for first (otherwise the club becomes insolvent).

If equity is required to continually plug such losses it doesn't really matter that much what the percentage turns out to be if it is having (or the majority of it is) to be used elsewhere.

This is in my wheelhouse and it’s still excruciating.

Same shit being guessed at using out of date numbers and incomplete understanding of methodologies.

Subsequently knocked back in an understated but obvious way by someone who clearly knows more than most, only to be taken as the cue to double down, add more words but ultimately say the same thing again. And any opportunity on any thread to roll it out is duly pounced upon for regurgitation.

I can’t even ‘ignore’ as my account doesn’t seem to have that functionality. I can’t wait to be discussing whether we could actually win the league after doing PNE 3-0 on the opening day.

2 hours ago, Sluffy said:

We simply don't know until the EFL says what's counted and what's not.

The players wages will no doubt be the main contributing factor to the 98.8% shown in the last accounts, we will just have to see what percentage of turnover EFL's SCR determines that to be once it comes into force and don't forget the remaining amount not included as SCR still is a major cost on the business that posted a loss of £14.3m.

The trading loss is priority on FV's equity, that has to be budgeted for first (otherwise the club becomes insolvent).

If equity is required to continually plug such losses it doesn't really matter that much what the percentage turns out to be if it is having (or the majority of it is) to be used elsewhere.

2 hours ago, Sluffy said:

We simply don't know until the EFL says what's counted and what's not.

The players wages will no doubt be the main contributing factor to the 98.8% shown in the last accounts, we will just have to see what percentage of turnover EFL's SCR determines that to be once it comes into force and don't forget the remaining amount not included as SCR still is a major cost on the business that posted a loss of £14.3m.

The trading loss is priority on FV's equity, that has to be budgeted for first (otherwise the club becomes insolvent).

If equity is required to continually plug such losses it doesn't really matter that much what the percentage turns out to be if it is having (or the majority of it is) to be used elsewhere.

Told you yesterday you need to be humble and admit you are often wrong....Either that or you need a new abicas

@Eddie If it is in your wheelhouse and you know me to be wrong then please correct me as I'm more than happy to be better informed.

The numbers are, as I constantly reference, the most up to date in the public domain, taken from the latest clubs accounts and signed off by Sharon as recently as the 31st March 2026 - less than 3 months ago.

Whether jmjhb knows more than he lets on, I have no idea but he didn't seem to be aware of the line in the executives introduction to the accounts about the 98.8% football wages to turnover, that continued -

"...the Directors recognise this ratio must improve as part of the progression to financial sustainability".

I would have thought someone 'in the know' would surely have also known this to be a publicly stated aim of the owners and presumably actively being worked on and in the process of implementation.

Edited Sunday at 19:511 day by Sluffy
typo

I really don’t want to be drawn into it as I’ve no intention of looking into the specifics of the ruling - frankly, I don’t care as I’ve every faith in this management team to be all over whatever we need to do / can do.

A couple of things I’d point out though:

• The ‘latest’ accounts that you’re referring to relate to a period that is now between 24 and 12 months out of date. Not even last season but the one before. Our cost base is likely to be very different and as @jmjhb points out, our revenue next season will be hugely different from last season, never mind compared to the accounts you’re looking at. You’re essentially 2 seasons out of date.

• Stat accounts never tell the full story. Management accounts will likely be different and more likely to be used to be the basis of the covenants set by this new FFP. Trying to unpick them to align with the ruling is fraught with inconsistency.

• There is no split in the stats of football / non-football related wages. It’s impossible to decipher. Plus we’ve just got rid of loads of them. Technicalities like treatment of management and coaching staff and where that line is drawn and how loan wages (both out and in) count will never be known to enough detail by anyone outside of those dealing with it in the club.

• You keep using a term ‘unspent equity’. I’ve no idea what you mean by that but can only come to the conclusion that you mean cash.

I appreciate that you’re clearly interested in this side of it and there’s nothing wrong with that, you’ve obviously spent a lot of time looking into it and trying to make sense of it - fair enough, not my idea of time well spent but each to their own. If you’d have set out your understanding of it (with the relevant caveats) and what implications it could have, and have done that once, then I don’t think people would have an issue with it.

It’s the fact that it’s said with such conviction, despite the multiple assumptions involved, and then concluded as though you’ve found something that the management of the the club won’t be aware of that is the first annoyance. To then just say it over and over again (I’ve read this same theory at least 10 times over multiple threads), which I can only see is done to try and get the approval and appreciation of others becomes really really tedious.

I’ve tried to ignore and just scroll past it but it seems to be everywhere and anywhere. Maybe it’s because there’s sod all else happening but its not the most enjoyable experience having my usual scroll through WW at the moment.

@Eddie Thank you.

Please accept my reply with the good intent that it is meant.

I am aware and have often stated that the latest accounts relate to the 2024-25 season. I've never claimed otherwise, I've stated, correctly I think you will agree, that they are the most recent detailed and audited information from FV (save the random filings at Companies House). I was also the first person on here to actually state the latest information on increase revenue due to promotion to the Championship was shown to be £12m and posted a link to it at the time.

I've never tried to unpick the accounts to align with SCR, I've merely used the information to demonstrate the effects SCR will have and how FV will need to adapt to them. SCR is not the 'new' FFP it is a totally new way of attempting to force clubs to run within their current financial revenues (FFP was basically a cap on clubs overspending on a 3 year rolling cycle).

I agree there is no current split in the stats of football / non football related wages BUT that is exactly what SCR are instructing clubs to do in future (starting as far as anyone knows on Wednesday 1st July, just 3 days away). You claim it is "impossible to decipher" well clubs will have to achieve the impossible then...

The SCR system limits Clubs spending on Player and Manager-related costs (including transfer fees) to a set percentage of their income, alongside a limited level of owner funding.

Championship and League One Clubs approve changes to financial control rules - The English Football League

...what jmjhb were doing was simply speculating who and what exactly the Manager-related costs would apply too - which no one knows until the EFL inform clubs accordingly.

Obvious I agree with you that only the club would know that information but in future it might be shown under the notes in the accounts.

I use the term unspent equity being what the Companies Statement of Changes in Equity show (see p18 of the latest accounts shown as 21 of 42 in the 'page counter' at the top of the document) in effect the Share Capital is shown as £6.6m and the Share Premium as £25.5m and the reserves shown as (£58.2m) hence why £30m of recapitalised equity had to be put in and why I reckon there was circa £5m left in equity (or as I've called it unspent equity) - maybe I've been understand this wrongly perhaps?

I would be utterly delighted to state just the once my understanding of these matters, showing the relevant caveats and links to all relevant documents (which I do anyway) but I've yet to find anyone who seems to comprehend them (even you if you didn't understand the required split in future of 'Management-related costs, away from none management related costs as per SCR requirements).

I not here seeking any form of validation for myself, I'm not that needy, vain or conceited, I simply do so to share my understanding with those who wish to know, and for what it is worth a few do by means of posting 'likes' to my posts.

I thank you for spending your time to answer me and noting I've spent time and effort making sense of something most people are not the least bit interested in.

At the end of the day stuff like this has a direct bearing as what will happen on the pitch, some fans do want to know about it.

Kindest regards to you

Edited Sunday at 22:241 day by Sluffy

OK ... everyone.

Let us know how many of those paragraphs you read before you gave up.

There are 13 in all, plus the attachment.

I got to paragraph #3.

10 minutes ago, Dr. Feelgood said:

OK ... everyone.

Let us know how many of those paragraphs you read before you gave up.

There are 13 in all, plus the attachment.

I got to paragraph #3.

My favourite line is at the top where it says ' you have chosen to ignore content by sluffy'

To be fair to me, I agreed to keep most of the financial stuff in this thread and that is what I've done.

Fairs fair fellas

8 hours ago, Dr. Feelgood said:

OK ... everyone.

Let us know how many of those paragraphs you read before you gave up.

There are 13 in all, plus the attachment.

I got to paragraph #3.

They're not for me, so none.

Others do and that's up to them.

Life's too short!

10 hours ago, Sluffy said:

I not here seeking any form of validation for myself, I'm not that needy, vain or conceited,

I think that's exactly what you're doing.

Whilst still awaiting @Eddie reply I've sought the help of AI (I still would prefer Eddies opinion though).

Q to AI - bolton wanderers accounts 30 june 2025 How much equity is shown to be in the business

In the annual accounts for the year ending 30 June 2025, the consolidated group (Football Ventures (Whites) Limited) reports a negative total equity position of -£7.06 million (presented as net liabilities).The breakdown of the total equity components at the year-end is as follows:

Called-Up Share Capital: £6.62 million

Share Premium Account: £25.55 million

Capital Redemption Reserve: £750,000

Accumulated Losses: -£39.99 million

Total Equity: -£7.06 million

Q to AI - is your analysis correct because the accounts show profit and loss reserves of minus £58,238,389

Yes, your figure is correct. The profit and loss reserve is exactly minus £58,238,389 (accumulated historical losses). [1]

The previous calculation of -£39.99 million was missing the newly incurred £14.36 million loss for the 2025 financial year, on top of existing baseline adjustments. [1]

Corrected Breakdown of Capital and Reserves

When evaluating the full Total Equity (Total Capital and Reserves) from the balance sheet of Football Ventures (Whites) Limited as of 30 June 2025, the exact figures are:

• Called-Up Share Capital: £6.62 million

• Share Premium Account: £23.80 million

• Capital Redemption Reserve: £750,000

• Profit and Loss Account (Accumulated Losses): -£58,238,389

• Total Shareholder Equity: -£27.06 million

So according to AI and awaiting Eddie's opinion (or anyone else on here who has an understanding of accounts) the £30m invested last summer was to clear the 27m equity debt outstanding leaving only £3m in the kitty for the season just ended.

If correct there is no money in the club pay this seasons trading loss (which I assume will be far greater than £3m) and nothing in the pot for any transfer business.

FV have had to make a Solvency Statement that they will fund and complete the coming season.

I don't doubt they will, meaning they will already covering the trading losses of last season, found some money for transfers and will ensure that trading costs for next season will be met.

Fwiw (and because I've struggled to understand why the accumulated losses are stated as they are) they are comprised of £40m prior to the 2025 accounts plus the £14.3 trading deficit in 2025 - the bit I've been stupidly missing all this time is that the losses are COMPANY losses, not just the clubs, and the remaining balance are the losses from the hotel)

28 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Whilst still awaiting @Eddie reply I've sought the help of AI (I still would prefer Eddies opinion though).

Q to AI - bolton wanderers accounts 30 june 2025 How much equity is shown to be in the business

In the annual accounts for the year ending 30 June 2025, the consolidated group (Football Ventures (Whites) Limited) reports a negative total equity position of -£7.06 million (presented as net liabilities).The breakdown of the total equity components at the year-end is as follows:

Called-Up Share Capital: £6.62 million

Share Premium Account: £25.55 million

Capital Redemption Reserve: £750,000

Accumulated Losses: -£39.99 million

Total Equity: -£7.06 million

Q to AI - is your analysis correct because the accounts show profit and loss reserves of minus £58,238,389

Yes, your figure is correct. The profit and loss reserve is exactly minus £58,238,389 (accumulated historical losses). [1]

The previous calculation of -£39.99 million was missing the newly incurred £14.36 million loss for the 2025 financial year, on top of existing baseline adjustments. [1]

Corrected Breakdown of Capital and Reserves

When evaluating the full Total Equity (Total Capital and Reserves) from the balance sheet of Football Ventures (Whites) Limited as of 30 June 2025, the exact figures are:

• Called-Up Share Capital: £6.62 million

• Share Premium Account: £23.80 million

• Capital Redemption Reserve: £750,000

• Profit and Loss Account (Accumulated Losses): -£58,238,389

• Total Shareholder Equity: -£27.06 million

So according to AI and awaiting Eddie's opinion (or anyone else on here who has an understanding of accounts) the £30m invested last summer was to clear the 27m equity debt outstanding leaving only £3m in the kitty for the season just ended.

If correct there is no money in the club pay this seasons trading loss (which I assume will be far greater than £3m) and nothing in the pot for any transfer business.

FV have had to make a Solvency Statement that they will fund and complete the coming season.

I don't doubt they will, meaning they will already covering the trading losses of last season, found some money for transfers and will ensure that trading costs for next season will be met.

Fwiw (and because I've struggled to understand why the accumulated losses are stated as they are) they are comprised of £40m prior to the 2025 accounts plus the £14.3 trading deficit in 2025 - the bit I've been stupidly missing all this time is that the losses are COMPANY losses, not just the clubs, and the remaining balance are the losses from the hotel)

You’ll be waiting a while

11 minutes ago, Eddie said:

You’ll be waiting a while

Then I take it that you can't refute what I've said namely that the 2025 accounts showed a black hole of share holder equity of £27m, the £30m equity put in last year was to plug it and no more equity has since been invested and reported to Companies House since.

The aggregated annual trading losses being covered from share holder equity.

Just shoot me down if I'm wrong.

I'll be much happier to be corrected than for FV to find itself in the financial position of that as I've outlined (and AI seemingly has confirmed).

Edited 19 hours ago19 hr by Sluffy

1 hour ago, Sluffy said:

Whilst still awaiting @Eddie reply I've sought the help of AI (I still would prefer Eddies opinion though).

Q to AI - bolton wanderers accounts 30 june 2025 How much equity is shown to be in the business

In the annual accounts for the year ending 30 June 2025, the consolidated group (Football Ventures (Whites) Limited) reports a negative total equity position of -£7.06 million (presented as net liabilities).The breakdown of the total equity components at the year-end is as follows:

Called-Up Share Capital: £6.62 million

Share Premium Account: £25.55 million

Capital Redemption Reserve: £750,000

Accumulated Losses: -£39.99 million

Total Equity: -£7.06 million

Q to AI - is your analysis correct because the accounts show profit and loss reserves of minus £58,238,389

Yes, your figure is correct. The profit and loss reserve is exactly minus £58,238,389 (accumulated historical losses). [1]

The previous calculation of -£39.99 million was missing the newly incurred £14.36 million loss for the 2025 financial year, on top of existing baseline adjustments. [1]

Corrected Breakdown of Capital and Reserves

When evaluating the full Total Equity (Total Capital and Reserves) from the balance sheet of Football Ventures (Whites) Limited as of 30 June 2025, the exact figures are:

• Called-Up Share Capital: £6.62 million

• Share Premium Account: £23.80 million

• Capital Redemption Reserve: £750,000

• Profit and Loss Account (Accumulated Losses): -£58,238,389

• Total Shareholder Equity: -£27.06 million

So according to AI and awaiting Eddie's opinion (or anyone else on here who has an understanding of accounts) the £30m invested last summer was to clear the 27m equity debt outstanding leaving only £3m in the kitty for the season just ended.

If correct there is no money in the club pay this seasons trading loss (which I assume will be far greater than £3m) and nothing in the pot for any transfer business.

FV have had to make a Solvency Statement that they will fund and complete the coming season.

I don't doubt they will, meaning they will already covering the trading losses of last season, found some money for transfers and will ensure that trading costs for next season will be met.

Fwiw (and because I've struggled to understand why the accumulated losses are stated as they are) they are comprised of £40m prior to the 2025 accounts plus the £14.3 trading deficit in 2025 - the bit I've been stupidly missing all this time is that the losses are COMPANY losses, not just the clubs, and the remaining balance are the losses from the hotel)

Stop it

Just stop it

Post about when you went in the flying Scotsman and tipped a pound in a pint glass

Losing the will to live

16 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

Stop it

Just stop it

Post about when you went in the flying Scotsman and tipped a pound in a pint glass

You can shoot the messenger if you like but I've just proved beyond any doubt that the last accounts showed that FV had a black hole of £27m (I've even explained whereabouts on the accounts that people can see this for themselves)

I understand that Eddie is an accountant or certainly financially savvy, I know Road Runner Fan actually is one, so it should be easy for them to shoot me down and shut me up.

I don't believe they can though because the numbers on the accounts don't lie.

I won't go on about it anymore, I think I've finally proven my point in spite of all the upset it seems to have caused.

I would rather have Eddie, Road Runner or anyone prove me wrong than to see FV in such a predicament, it certainly wouldn't surprise me (if no one doesn't shoot me down) if FV are looking to sell and let someone else recapitalise us.

41 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

Stop it

Just stop it

Post about when you went in the flying Scotsman and tipped a pound in a pint glass

Flying scotsman rip